|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 16, 2016 15:28:12 GMT -5
For one I think 30 days for GM at end of year is a very lite punishment. Second MLB needs to come down hard on the team with a huge fine and loss of a first round pick if not more. Why not go with the padres have to lose all the prospects they got in the trades and they immediately become eligible to sign with any other team except the padres and they can't make a trade for the next two years...
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 12, 2016 19:35:42 GMT -5
Wow is Hanley hot or what!!!
Wonder what the exit velocity on that off speed pitch was?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 11, 2016 18:28:10 GMT -5
For those interested, Kopech had an amazing year, really like few pitchers have ever had over a stretch of five games. In the results of his last two games, we can infer that he had a dead-arm injury, perhaps from trying to do too much too soon. I'm guessing the Sox will play it safe and let him recover rather than call him up, however much they do need him. And they do need him. But just for the history books .... Next year, given only good health, Kopech will be among the best "fastest throwing" pitchers in MLB MiLB.
It's not clear whether the Sox will need him more as a starter like Syndegaard, or a reliever like Chapman. Either way, he'll be among the best. Be well, until next year. dj Saying he'll be among the best pitchers in MLB next year is the most deepjohnish statement I've ever seen, apart from the "most dominant 6 inning stretch in the history of baseball" gem. At least we're saved from having to deal with this trolling during the offseason. Hey humanbeingbean with just a little editing of DJ's post your highlighted part could make sense...
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Sept 3, 2016 22:00:30 GMT -5
Way to go DAVE!!!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 18, 2016 13:20:46 GMT -5
Xander should be the #9 hitter when we have our regular lineup out there. And if he would learn to bunt than Mookie woulda coulda shoulda been an rbi machine there...
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 15, 2016 15:13:17 GMT -5
Kimbrel needs to use that low hook when it is 1-2 or with 2 strikes anyway instead of 0-1 ... then can't get the out like he has been doing way to much.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 15, 2016 14:37:42 GMT -5
Dang can this team even win for Pomeranz??? Pitches a solid game and Farrell expects him to go 8? Then when he can't here comes Farrell and his man Abad with the tying run on. Sure seems like it is poorly managed to me. I guess if your manager believes it is all due to luck than it works!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 13, 2016 21:21:48 GMT -5
Margot on the mound. What do we get tonight? 3 Outs
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 10, 2016 18:19:29 GMT -5
boston.redsox.mlb.com/bos/ballpark/information/index.jsp?content=groundrulesFenway Park Ground Rules Batted ball over line on top of the left field wall: Home Run. Fair ball going through scoreboard, either on the bound or in flight: Two Bases. Batted ball in flight striking to the right of yellow line on left center field wall behind flagpole: Home Run. Batted ball in flight striking left center field wall to left of line behind flagpole and bounding into seats on top of center field wall: Home Run. Batted ball in flight striking left of line in right center field and bounding into bullpen: Home Run. Fair ball striking the ladder below top of left field wall and bounding out of park: Two Bases. Seems clear enough. Funny, Girardi knew what ground rules were, the MFY announcers knew what they were, but the NESN announcers were arguing that hitting the yellow line was a home run. After listening to 185 year old Vin Scully out inform, out hustle, and out entertain our local broadcasting darlings the question arises...don't the fans deserve better? And now the umpires went and took pictures of the top of the wall in center to confirm that there is NO padding on the wall when Benny's ball hit the top to make it a home run as they correctly ruled. In fact Nesn confirmed that just now. NY replay claimed it hit the padding in front of the top of wall. That now is shown to be incorrect. So now who wins??? LOL
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 10, 2016 8:19:47 GMT -5
This man needs to be in our bullpen. Hembree has retired 26 of the last 27 Triple-A batters he has faced, while striking out 16 of those 27 hitters. As much as i personally like Brentz who's hitting .279 in 61 at bats despite this threat acting like he's one of the worst players in baseball, we should really consider swapping these 2. Hembree can contribute and keep our pens arms fresh. How is Chris Young doing? Seems last we heard he was going to rehab assignment this week and as such would be back (next week?) up. As such Brentz will be going down and no place for Hembree on the 25 man there.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Aug 10, 2016 8:12:22 GMT -5
The yellow line in left CF is in play. A ball needs to hit to its right to be a HR. Everyone seemed to forget that except the umpire in NYC. O'Brien and Remy mentioned it a few innings later. Exactly, that was clearly not a HR, reviewers got it right. The umps initial call before they huddled was not a HR signal either. If it had bounced into the stands instead of onto the field, it would have been a ground ruled double. Essentially the same as any other wall ball. I agree it wasn't a HR last night because of the park rule. But the park rule is clearly wrong. As shown on TV last night the line's left edge is clearly above the flat top of the stands (and noted by Remy), If the ball hits the top it is a HR, if the ball hits below the bottom of the yellow line (which is clearly the top of the ledge) it is also a HR... so how can the yellow line be in hit territory and not a HR. The rule is clearly wrong and needs to be re-clarified.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on May 12, 2016 22:01:36 GMT -5
And theyve been one of the 4 best teams almost every single year the past decade. Name a more successful team the past decade among the 120ish major sports teams. Not to start a huge off-topic conversation but the San Antonio Spurs may be close Naw they haven't been caught cheating 4 or 5 times so they don't count~!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on May 2, 2016 9:14:57 GMT -5
Placement and promotion can't realistically be affected by weather considerations. Just doesn't make sense. Red sox players and every player assigned to Portland or Pawtuckett are dealing with the same thing. If players make it far enough they all have to deal with it. Imagine the political problems if players felt that was true. One guy gets sent to Salem the other one gets sent to Portland, players bellyaching about where they are sent based on the cold. It would be the same thing as sitting a top prospect because it happens to be a real cold night down south. Just to protect him from a possible muscle strain. Is it better for an elite player like Benny to have never experienced it until he is expected to perform in Boston? I don't think so. Oh it makes sense. Higher level prospects get treated differently all the time. There is also a consideration to how a player will adjust to a new level. Is it easier to adjust to AA straight out of spring in terrible weather conditions or in mid/late May after success in high A and good weather conditions? Yes In Boston he will have to play in cold weather but again the chances of his first exposure to Boston being in the cold are remote. Plus the kid is from Ohio, surely he played some ball in HS and that might be a little bit on the cold side. Do we actually need to go to weather history to find out if he had to play in the 30's and 40's?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on May 2, 2016 8:54:40 GMT -5
They have been conservative with Benintendi considering he was s D1 college player but that's not a bad thing. This is a guy who is less then a year from being drafted. It's going to be ok. He will be in Portland in the not to distant future and AA is the Boston doorstep. I don't want to say there are plenty if guys who skip AAA but there are quite a few and plenty that don't spend much of any time there. In any event, if he keeps playing this way he's going to be in Boston by next summer. Same time frame as if he started in AA. Having success and gaining confidence is not a bad thing. I agree with this, if we look at another top outfielder (Ellsbury 05 in Lowell), he came up to A+ - AA in his second season... Then by June of 07 he saw limited action in Boston. I believe the system in place here hasn't really changed that much and will dictate that type of learning situation for Benintendi.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 26, 2016 18:58:01 GMT -5
Good bounce back inning for Price. Let's make this a laugher! I doubt by the looks of the two different strike zones Joe West will let that happen.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 16, 2016 10:50:51 GMT -5
Do you think maybe we should stop writing about how CVaz is stealing strikes so that the umpires who come here don't catch on? Great win. Much needed, and a good start to the series to get their bullpen in early. And who saw that coming from Sandoval? A real injury, not just an over-fattening? I hope the guy gets healthy, gets fit, and comes back next year with a monster season. Looked like to me yesterday Toronto's catcher got a heck of a lot more "stolen" strikes out of the zone. Maybe CVaz needs more work at not jerking in to fast and hard. Those foot outside to the lefties for K's sure seemed more one sided to me.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 9, 2016 21:03:18 GMT -5
Lol this is by far the most misguided argument. "Greinke/Kluber got lit up too!" Umm, Greinke/Kluber/insert real ace/ has recent track records of not being dogsh!t Sigh ... times like these, when my "so over-the-top negative comment it's an obvious satire of over-the-top negative comments" post gets taken seriously, I'm tempted to use italics. But then I remember using italics to indicate sarcasm is terrible and an offense against all that's holy. It's a game day thread everyone gets to be in on the act. What do you expect?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 9, 2016 21:00:03 GMT -5
Yea, and Cleveland's aces n Toronto's got 1 out in the 6th or didn't get there either? Guess all those aces need to be discarded too. Lol this is by far the most misguided argument. "Greinke/Kluber got lit up too!" Umm, Greinke/Kluber/insert real ace/ has recent track records of not being dogsh!t So did Panda. So did Hanley and what did all that win him from those on here last fall?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 9, 2016 19:21:26 GMT -5
I love how fans (and journalists) already started with the Price + the others crap, assuming that all 4 other starters stink. And this started after Buchholz' start with 3 pitchers who didn't even get ONE start yet. Actually 4 if you include Rodriguez. That's gotta be a record for being impatient. Look, you can make excuses all you want, Mr Blue Skies, but the fact remains that outside of Price there's only been 1 (one!) starting pitcher who pitched into the sixth inning THIS WHOLE SEASON. Yea, and Cleveland's aces n Toronto's got 1 out in the 6th or didn't get there either? Guess all those aces need to be discarded too.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 9, 2016 14:35:30 GMT -5
Finally in the 4th game Mookie takes a walk. he needs to figure out how to take what is given to him this year...
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Mar 23, 2016 10:01:02 GMT -5
I think Murphy and Young as a platoon in left might be better than Rusney. Rusney struggles getting the ball out of the infield unless he gets it in the hole and if it is true he is struggling with 93 MPH+ fastballs that is going to show up way worse for us in the future.
Murphy career splits are good plus his (30+ yr old) last 4 yr splits look ok at around .265+ and about .320+ obp, if we split that with what Young will look like it will be better than what Rusney puts up and with Rusney in Pawtucket on an option the Sox would be better off seems like right now.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Feb 10, 2016 12:10:09 GMT -5
Yeah that's overly harsh. Swihart's 91 wRC+ ranked 189th out of 268 players with at least 300 PA last season. It's not that good, but as a 23 year old rookie, that's OK I guess. He certainly projects to be a good enough hitter to be on some team as a non-catcher. It might not be as a starter, but still... he would be a major leaguer. I got a pair of questions that should be asked I believe: With Blake clearly struggling in his first half through 40 Games and only hitting .240/279/323 and 623 ops then in the second half in 44 games hitting .303/353/452 and 805 ops Why would that not be better than average for any young rookie? Why would you be lead to believe he can't hit in the Major leagues with that line? That looks normal to me for a lot of young MLB kids.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 15, 2016 22:12:21 GMT -5
Well after all you guys come back down to earth and quit complaining back and forth about which is the hardest sport or they isn't any one sport that is such ... well I will tell you there is a winner for the hardest sport on earth and your all wrong.
After sitting on the back of broncs from the age of 7 for all those years through rain, sleet, snow, ice, and hotter n Heck sun till your old enough to get a chance at the pros well that is the one. Every dang cowboy in the country knows sitting on that saddle bronc for 8 seconds 5 to 7 nights in a row after getting stomped on by a 1000+ lb bronc without him showing you any mercy ... Well that is the hardest ... Yep PBA bronc riding is the hardest so ya all can quit arguing about it now!!!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 7, 2016 14:19:35 GMT -5
Not everyone feels that way. Thats why Bonds and Clemens are getting 45% of the hall of fame votes. That opinion isn't any less valid because you disagree with it. I don't think he would've been a top 5 pitcher in baseball history without steroids. Roy Halladay said "When you use steroids you admit you're not good enough to compete fairly. Our nations past time should have higher standards. No clemens no bonds." I agree with him, as do a lot of hall of fame voters. Now if you think he was a great Red Sox that could've been a hall of famer anyway, great. But we'll never know what his career would've looked like without steroids. A good portion of the fan base doesn't like him and you can respect his Red Sox accomplishments without retiring his number. Thats the argument. If roid use is a contributing factor to HOF than Hank Aaron should lose his HR's and also be kick out plus others like Willy Mays and his "Red Juice"concoction of speed and fruit juice, Whitey Ford and his DMSO concoction that takes drugs into the system through the skin (these where acknowledged to by the player and team mates), Mickey Mantle and his hip “vitamin injection” loaded with amphetamines, steroids, bone marrow, and animal cells, and other substances all by his quack doctor, and along with 6 or 7 pitchers per team from the 60's on. Players like House and Damon acknowledged that to be true and others like Dock Ellis also admitted it. it is a widely known fact that this was the case in other sports during the same time so we as fans either have to acknowledge that all these shouldn't be in or shut the heck up about the current ones who have the same of better stats who did nothing that these prior generations didn't do and got in. When are you going to call for all of them to be kicked out with just the proof of the same type of people as Roger and the others?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Dec 15, 2015 23:47:14 GMT -5
Here's the problem using straightforward probability estimates. Let's be really negative and assume a 75% bust rate for the average prospect. Leave aside the definition of what a bust actually is, we'll get to that in a minute. The more prospects, that's the n below, that you throw into a trade, the higher the likelihood you'll have at least one succeed. How likely? Simple to estimate. The probability that they all fail is: P(all fail) = .75n That's with the straightforward assumption of independence. There's no reason, for example, to assume that Middlebrooks' cratering would drag Cecchini into the same hole. The probability that at least one "succeeds" simply requires that we subtract the above number from 1: P(one or more success) = 1-.75n . For n = 4 prospects, we're already at a nearly 70% chance of having at least one success. Let's set that conceptual bar low as well - say a career 10 WAR for that successful player. You see the problem. Even assuming a very high bust rate, and little value for the players who do make it, we're just about at Kimbrel's expected value for the next three years (Expected Value = .684 x 10 WAR = 6.84 WAR). His average over the last five very good years is 2.5 wins more than a replacement player. So lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say he does that for 7.5 wins over those three years. Assuming any more than that - say two players at 15 wins a piece - and you've lost a lot of value. That's even with that steep discount rate you want to apply for future wins (and you've not mentioned how far into the future you want to apply that either) *. This ends up being a very tight box, one that there's no way to easily escape from. There are a lot of reasons for the trade, and Dombrowski strikes me as someone who's not afraid to roll the dice. But the numbers are not on his side here. *I really, really dislike the idea of discounting the future. Its use has brought about all sorts of economic mayhem in the natural resource arena.I got a question on that underlined part as it assumes that the team controls the one prospect for his entire career or is the figure for the total control years which should be what 5?
|
|